About as often as they actually release anything
About as often as they actually release anything
I wouldn’t get too excited. Supposedly the next headset is internally called Deckard, and it’s been “about to release” for like 3 years now? Pretty much everything people think they know about it is conjecture based off code Valve has tucked away in SteamVR; zero public statements of intent.
As for VR on Linux… kinda? I’ve only read terrible things about it online. I have an Index and tried to use it with Mint a few months back, and while it mostly worked without any configuration issues, there was a weird white ring around the edge of the screen that I couldn’t figure out.
I’m no expert. But probably there just isn’t enough evidence yet to accuse China as a whole of systematically doping its athletes. I’d imagine they err on the side of “allowing participation” with this kind of stuff.
I’m pretty sure Russia only got banned because they had a state-sponsored doping system. Long as you don’t get caught with that, you can be as authoritarian as you want.
They literally already tried and failed with the phoneification of windows when everyone shat on 8. I guess some ahole UI designer still works there and is bitter that people didn’t like their ideas.
Just 3 days ago I had to use the control panel to access the settings I needed to get my parents’ printer to work right. Even tried to use the regular settings menu for maybe 10 minutes before remembering how to access the settings I needed. Here’s hoping my parents never run into printer issues again (lol).
FUCK YOU, MICROSOFT!
I think Republicans are also generally disengaged. That’s what enables them to vote for so much monstrous garbage; they don’t pay enough attention to know what they’re voting for. There are also plenty of true believers who really are christian nationalists, but for most people, if they follow the policy positions, they’d be Democrats.
So when it comes to the number of people watching a convention, the DNC sorta naturally attracts more people since the base is paying more attention.
I’m gonna say some stuff that most of the people here probably know on some level, but considering this thread, I think it needs to be explicitly said.
Very few of the people who post comments on the internet are highly educated in whatever field they’re making a claim in. Getting challenged by people who know next to nothing and receive all the upvotes anyway is an exhausting experience, so many well-educated people keep their debates private. If they are here, you probably aren’t enough of an expert to recognize them. The simple, easy to understand takes are what get upvoted, and in-depth, nuanced ideas are almost always ignored or ridiculed. Most forums are full of people who know just enough to feel confident in making calls for radical action without any knowledge of how that action could be implemented or would play out.
Look through this comment section. Lots of vague, single-sentence arguments about being “capitalist,” “communist,” or “socialist,” along with “leftist,” “liberal,” or “conservative,” but I don’t see a single one acknowledging that each of those words can individually encompass vast groups of conflicting ideas and have wildly different meanings in different parts of the world; a serious problem considering at least a few of the people posting in this thread aren’t in the US. Very little discussion of substantive ideas like “people should be given a universal basic income of $15 a day,” or “food stamps should be granted without application to anyone under a certain income threshold,” or “social media servers should receive public funding and be administrated by an elected body.” It’s almost never more specific than “universal healthcare,” or “abolish the police,” Those might be the right direction, but when was the last time you saw people discussing things like whether experimental treatments should be covered, or the number and type of professions that should replace the current myriad of roles police are expected to fill? I seriously doubt if you randomly selected two self-described communists (or whatever ideology) on Lemmy and had them start making decisions together, that they would agree with each other on exactly how society should be run even half the time.
I’m not saying these conversations shouldn’t happen, vague as they are. I certainly don’t have the energy to write out long arguments 99% of the time. We all have to make our own way to finding deeper knowledge, and building a knowledge base of buzzwords can be a useful stepping stone. But far too often people stop once they feel they have a sufficient understanding of the buzzwords and then start talking like they know the answers. it’s important to temper the depth of your convictions based on where you’re having the discussion, where you’re getting your knowledge. Are you watching youtube videos and reading unsourced comments, or are you reading research papers from institutions with a history of making accurate claims? Are you reading news articles from ad-supported papers, and if you are, are you checking whether those articles are making sources available for readers check on? Should I have bothered writing several paragraphs under a meme of a glowing red bird, and am I really qualified to tell people to be more careful with their discussions?
Changing amendments is no problem when you have judges to “reinterpret” them at will